I am developing an application that allows for a user to manage some individual data points. One of the things that my users will want to do is “delete” but what should that mean?
For a web application is it better to present a user with the option to have serious delete or to use a “trash” system?
Under “serious delete” (would love to know if there is a better name for this…) you click “delete” and then the user is warned “this is final and tragic action. Once you do this you will not be able to get -insert data point name here- back, even if you are crying…”
Then if they click delete… well it truly is gone forever.
Under the “trash” model, you never trust that the user really wants to delete… instead you remove the data point from the “main display” and put into a bucket called “the trash”. This gets it out of the users way, which is what they usually want, but they can get it back if they make a mistake. Obviously this is the way most operating systems have gone.
The advantages of “serious delete” are:
- Easy to implement
- Easy to explain to users
The disadvantages of “serious delete” are:
- it can be tragically final
- sometimes, cats walk on keyboards
The advantages of the “trash” system are:
- user is safe from themselves
- bulk methods like “delete a bunch at once” make more sense
- saves support headaches
The disadvantages of the “trash” system are”:
- For sensitive data, you create an illusion of destruction users think something is gone, but it is not.
- Lots of subtle distinctions make implementation more difficult
- Do you “eventually” delete the contents of the trash?
My question is which one is the right design pattern for modern web applications? How does an “archive” function work into this? That is how gmail works. Give enough discussion to justify your answer… Would love to be pointed towards some relevant research.
-FT
I think you pretty well summarized the pros and cons for the trash model:
Pro: Overall, better for the user.
Con: Overall, easier for the developer.
For a usability specialist like myself, it’s a no brainer. As far as I’m concerned developers are supposed to work hard to make life easier for users. Frankly, until web apps have Undo capabilities like trash, I don’t think we can consider them usable. Time that web apps catch up to 1984.
A few other details:
Another advantage of the trash model is the capacity to eliminate the need for confirmation message in most cases. The vast majority of the time, the user is deleting something intentionally, so putting an extra step in with a confirmation message is usually adding work for them. Worse, they get in the habit of smacking OK quickly, which generalizes to other confirmations they really better read. See http://alistapart.com/articles/neveruseawarning.
Part of the beauty of the trash metaphor is that it suggests to user that deleting is not permanent. Like a physical trash can, objects can be retrieved. If you feature the trash can obviously enough on your page (so users realize they can open it), and include an image of the trash can as an icon next to the Delete menu item, that should be enough to indicate that deleting doesn’t destroy, but rather moves things to the trash.
It’s probably acceptable to destroy the oldest deletions in the trash if there are performance considerations. That is once again consistent with the trash can metaphor: users can anticipate that sooner or later “someone” is going to empty the trash. I don’t think users will care if the trash never empties. If they need to truly destroy something sensitive, you can provide an explicit procedure for it (e.g., deleting something that’s already in the trash).